987 réponses à ce sujet

[LordKinoda]

Why is it so hard to understand that how the NPC reacts is completely immaterial? Any conversation in which the listener perfectly interprets the speaker's intent is unrealistic, and IMO quite frankly boring.

There is no other main focus to go on. The NPC's reaction is the main focus of what you have to understand the silent character's intent. If the protagonist speaks for themselves then you don't have to worry about this.

I prefer the silent one. It's my character, it's me. Not some Hawke, okay? It sounds cool in ME, but ME was ALWAYS a game with voiced main hero. DA:O wasn't

IMO that was a mistake from the start. Should of ALWAYS been voiced for DA as well.

The absence of voice is neutral, it does not carry within it a number of factors that actively restrict role play, (a particular style, personality, etc), the voice is not, and enforces a number of characteristics into the character that may not be those the player desires, and cause it to be far less fun to the unfortunate player that so dislikes the provided voices, (and at worse may even make the game unplayable).

I wouldn't say it's neutral by no stretch. I don't PREFER silent characters, period. I can put up with them if I must, and I will still enjoy myself with the game if it's story is good and the action is fun, etc., as it was for KOTOR and DAO for example. But I will always have just a little more connection and fun with a fully voiced character.

I do not enjoy voiced protagonists. It is an opinion, people either want a more cinematic storyline, or one that allows you to feel more in the place of the character

I just can't agree that it's one or the other as you suggest. I feel MORE connected to a voiced character than I do a silent one. Granted that ME did it a little better than DA2 though. Hopefully DA3 will remedy some of the things that people didn't like about the dialog wheel in DA2.

Modifié par LordKinoda, 26 septembre 2011 - 04:25 .

[vallore]

Joy Divison wrote...

vallore wrote...

The absence of voice is neutral, it does not carry within it a number of factors that actively restrict role play, (a particular style, personality, etc), the voice is not, and enforces a number of characteristics into the character that may not be those the player desires, and cause it to be far less
fun to the unfortunate player that so dislikes the provided voices, (and at
worse may even make the game unplayable).

Wrong.  The absence of voice makes the protagonist an apathetic mute who just stares blankly while the "red shirts," generic NPCs, and other nobodies are brought to life.

That is not "neutral" that is stupid.  IMHO.

Talk about unplayable.

Nope, sorry, how can that be a serious problem,  if you don’t even see the face of your character during most of the dialogs you establish with the npcs?

Simply put, that is an over abused and mostly false argument.  The issue is, at most, occasional, the voice issues are constant.

One may like a voiced character, (and I’m guilty of such), but voice is always limiting, as it carries a number of information that restricts what you can play actively, and  not even the three voices/ moods provided by Bioware can avoid that.

Take the female Hawke for instance.  Even if I wanted  I couldn’t play a diplomatic but passionate about her beliefs character, as I found the diplomatic option voice was almost invariably devoid of passion or conviction.  It was not so much what she was saying but how she was saying. Because it was voiced it restricted the personality options for the character. Apathetic, bland, felt a apt description for Hawke, compared with the life that I could inbue into the mute Warden.

Want to play a subtle sarcastic character? The kind it merely hints what she is really thinking?

I found nothing subtle about Hawke sarcasm, and could not use any other answer as sarcasm as the actual voice acting excluded using any other answer but the one with the mask icon as sarcasm.

And so on.

But such restrictions didn't exist with the Warden because, without voice, it alowed you to fill it with the mood and style you disired, within far more generous limits than those Hawke allowed.



On the other hand, the issue you brought is not only occasional; it is far more
related with the animations provided than it is with voice.  After all, they could have made the character’s face have more emotion when they show it on Origins; they actually did so in a few occasions, like when the Cusland character finds his father wounded.

[LordKinoda]

But such restrictions didn't exist with the Warden because, without voice, it alowed you to fill it with the mood and style you disired, within far more generous limits than those Hawke allowed.

Good god, I don't know how many times I have to state this, I swear I should just put it in my signature or something. I'll just quote myself from the previous page to save myself some time.

"Adding your own idiosyncrasies to the Warden is all well and good for fan fiction, but it just can't matter for the game because the writers can't account for each and every player's personal choice. Hence the inherent limitation as making the NPC's respond only a certain way to a given line [of dialog]."

You cannot make the Warden ENTIRELY unique to you. It's just not possible. You can add SOME uniqueness to it for sure, but in the end there just have to be some things that are shoe-horned to move the story along. It's inevitable. Assigning this all encompassing individuality to the Warden is just downright silly, and you CANNOT argue anything to the contrary logically.

[vallore]

LordKinoda wrote...

But such restrictions didn't exist with the Warden because, without voice, it alowed you to fill it with the mood and style you disired, within far more generous limits than those Hawke allowed.

Good god, I don't know how many times I have to state this, I swear I should just put it in my signature or something. I'll just quote myself from the previous page to save myself some time.

"Adding your own idiosyncrasies to the Warden is all well and good for fan fiction, but it just can't matter for the game because the writers can't account for each and every player's personal choice. Hence the inherent limitation as making the NPC's respond only a certain way to a given line [of dialog]."

You cannot make the Warden ENTIRELY unique to you. It's just not possible. You can add SOME uniqueness to it for sure, but in the end there just have to be some things that are shoe-horned to move the story along. It's inevitable. Assigning this all encompassing individuality to the Warden is just downright silly, and you CANNOT argue anything to the contrary logically.

I can’t make the warden entirely unique? No I can’t and THAT WASN’T THE POINT. 

Can I shape him in a much larger degree than Hawke’s personality? Yes, because his personality isn’t restricted by the one provided with the voice acting.

Am I shoehorning him? No, because what I’m doing is working with a far greater
degree of freedom provided by one game style versus a lesser degree of freedom provided by another.

 

You need an example?

The phrase, “this is nice day, isn’t it?.”  Is simple and straightforward enough.  Yet,  I can obtain PRECISELY the same answer form the npc I’m addressing while conveying very different information within it, WHITHOUT  forcing it in a way that doesn’t really fit.

I can use a vibrant joyous tone, more an affirmation than a question, indicating the character is happy and loving it.

I can sound somewhat undecided, making it less an affirmation and more a request for confirmation.

I can use it as simply a pretext to start a conversation

And so on.

 

But with the voiced character, the only option is the one provided by the actor, period.

So no, logic very much supports this.

[esper]

vallore wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

vallore wrote...

The absence of voice is neutral, it does not carry within it a number of factors that actively restrict role play, (a particular style, personality, etc), the voice is not, and enforces a number of characteristics into the character that may not be those the player desires, and cause it to be far less
fun to the unfortunate player that so dislikes the provided voices, (and at
worse may even make the game unplayable).

Wrong.  The absence of voice makes the protagonist an apathetic mute who just stares blankly while the "red shirts," generic NPCs, and other nobodies are brought to life.

That is not "neutral" that is stupid.  IMHO.

Talk about unplayable.

Nope, sorry, how can that be a serious problem,  if you don’t even see the face of your character during most of the dialogs you establish with the npcs?

Simply put, that is an over abused and mostly false argument.  The issue is, at most, occasional, the voice issues are constant.

One may like a voiced character, (and I’m guilty of such), but voice is always limiting, as it carries a number of information that restricts what you can play actively, and  not even the three voices/ moods provided by Bioware can avoid that.

Take the female Hawke for instance.  Even if I wanted  I couldn’t play a diplomatic but passionate about her beliefs character, as I found the diplomatic option voice was almost invariably devoid of passion or conviction.  It was not so much what she was saying but how she was saying. Because it was voiced it restricted the personality options for the character. Apathetic, bland, felt a apt description for Hawke, compared with the life that I could inbue into the mute Warden.

Want to play a subtle sarcastic character? The kind it merely hints what she is really thinking?

I found nothing subtle about Hawke sarcasm, and could not use any other answer as sarcasm as the actual voice acting excluded using any other answer but the one with the mask icon as sarcasm.

And so on.

But such restrictions didn't exist with the Warden because, without voice, it alowed you to fill it with the mood and style you disired, within far more generous limits than those Hawke allowed.



On the other hand, the issue you brought is not only occasional; it is far more
related with the animations provided than it is with voice.  After all, they could have made the character’s face have more emotion when they show it on Origins; they actually did so in a few occasions, like when the Cusland character finds his father wounded.

My femHawke is diplomatic as a core personality, but very passionate about mage freedom. When that subject comes up  I just pick something else than diplomatic.

I found the wheel much less limititing than the non-voiceness as the limits in the wheel grated less on me than the limits in the wardens personality/ dialog three did. 

I am defintly more attached to Hawke than the warden, and I vastly prefer voice over silence.

[jo1243]

Well i gotta say silient protaganist all the way. You wanna character who is voiced play mass effect or just go watch a movie whats the point of creating a character i have next to no control over and no point in argueing there is no way to do it and not sound like an idiot. Origins gave choices with many different endings conclusions and choices the new system gave you 3 and still ended the same no matter what you chose. And i didnt even mention the voice the new hawk made me wanna beat him with a pipe every time he opened his mouth. Granted it would be difficult to make a sequal with that many alternate story lines but not everything has gottashow up in the sequal just the most important stuff.

[vallore]

esper wrote...

vallore wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

vallore wrote...

The absence of voice is neutral, it does not carry within it a number of factors that actively restrict role play, (a particular style, personality, etc), the voice is not, and enforces a number of characteristics into the character that may not be those the player desires, and cause it to be far less
fun to the unfortunate player that so dislikes the provided voices, (and at
worse may even make the game unplayable).

Wrong.  The absence of voice makes the protagonist an apathetic mute who just stares blankly while the "red shirts," generic NPCs, and other nobodies are brought to life.

That is not "neutral" that is stupid.  IMHO.

Talk about unplayable.

Nope, sorry, how can that be a serious problem,  if you don’t even see the face of your character during most of the dialogs you establish with the npcs?

Simply put, that is an over abused and mostly false argument.  The issue is, at most, occasional, the voice issues are constant.

One may like a voiced character, (and I’m guilty of such), but voice is always limiting, as it carries a number of information that restricts what you can play actively, and  not even the three voices/ moods provided by Bioware can avoid that.

Take the female Hawke for instance.  Even if I wanted  I couldn’t play a diplomatic but passionate about her beliefs character, as I found the diplomatic option voice was almost invariably devoid of passion or conviction.  It was not so much what she was saying but how she was saying. Because it was voiced it restricted the personality options for the character. Apathetic, bland, felt a apt description for Hawke, compared with the life that I could inbue into the mute Warden.

Want to play a subtle sarcastic character? The kind it merely hints what she is really thinking?

I found nothing subtle about Hawke sarcasm, and could not use any other answer as sarcasm as the actual voice acting excluded using any other answer but the one with the mask icon as sarcasm.

And so on.

But such restrictions didn't exist with the Warden because, without voice, it alowed you to fill it with the mood and style you disired, within far more generous limits than those Hawke allowed.



On the other hand, the issue you brought is not only occasional; it is far more
related with the animations provided than it is with voice.  After all, they could have made the character’s face have more emotion when they show it on Origins; they actually did so in a few occasions, like when the Cusland character finds his father wounded.

My femHawke is diplomatic as a core personality, but very passionate about mage freedom. When that subject comes up  I just pick something else than diplomatic.

I found the wheel much less limititing than the non-voiceness as the limits in the wheel grated less on me than the limits in the wardens personality/ dialog three did. 

I am defintly more attached to Hawke than the warden, and I vastly prefer voice over silence.

The ladyhawke I’ve played had much the same attitude, except I found the aggressive answers far too often belligerent, instead of conveying passion and conviction, and the sarcasm far too blunt and not really fitting to the concept  I had of the character.  

Now, since voice conveys far more information than just the equivalent written text, (and that is why it is a more precise tool and so many enjoy it more, imo) I didn’t had the option to custom the character as I would have wanted it, as the actor closed any other option with her acting.

As for the wheel, versus the dialogue tree, I honestly see only one limitation regarding the later, and that is of plain individual preference of voice over muteness, (but the reverse preference limitation also exist, of course).

 Frankly, if the voice provided does approach a character concept I’m interested in playing, I find voice acting greatly enjoyable, but if not, it becomes a barrier that can spoil the fun. My favorite example of this is Mass Effect: 

female Shepard has a style I greatly enjoy, as it fits a type of personality I enjoy playing, on the other hand, male Shepard acting is completely at odds with what I  would like Shepard to be; as a result I’ve abandoned playing with him early on. The dialogue itself available is mostly the same, the style of deliverance, it isn’t. In other words, the written text itself allows for greatly different styles and personalities while the actual spoken words greatly narrow it. That is why some, like me, can enjoy Hale’s performance, while not enjoying Meer’s and others prefer precisely the opposite.

[LordKinoda]

You need an example?

The phrase, “this is nice day, isn’t it?.” Is simple and straightforward enough. Yet, I can obtain PRECISELY the same answer form the npc I’m addressing while conveying very different information within it, WHITHOUT forcing it in a way that doesn’t really fit.

I can use a vibrant joyous tone, more an affirmation than a question, indicating the character is happy and loving it.

I can sound somewhat undecided, making it less an affirmation and more a request for confirmation.

I can use it as simply a pretext to start a conversation

And so on.



But with the voiced character, the only option is the one provided by the actor, period.

So no, logic very much supports this.

HA ! You are only proving what I JUST STATED. You are deluded into thinking you can apply MULTIPLE intents to a given line. It's just NOT possible. The NPC's only respond a certain way to a given line. Ugh. Only in your OWN mind does it make sense, with your imagination fixing the holes. The game cannot compensate for this. Period.

Neither option is perfect. Silent and Voiced characters both have their pros and cons. But for me, the voiced pros' far outweigh the cons everytime, whereas the silent does not. As I said, I can deal with a silent character, and still love the game as one of my all time favorites (KOTOR that'd be you), but a voiced character will always trump a silent one.

[Kail Ashton]

Yo LordKinoda take your medication and calm the hell down, it's a internet forum for maths sake

Anyways as for the actual topic, i could go either way really, i don't feel either contributes or adds to my experiance, i don't despretly need to BE the charecter, i simply enjoy watching it unfold while trying to stick with a certin style of choices (only way i'll remain a consistant **** to AI, it's alot easiar for me in real life for some reason O__o;)

[Oopsieoops]

vallore wrote...
The ladyhawke I’ve played had much the same attitude, except I found the aggressive answers far too often belligerent, instead of conveying passion and conviction, and the sarcasm far too blunt and not really fitting to the concept I had of the character.

Now, since voice conveys far more information than just the equivalent written text, (and that is why it is a more precise tool and so many enjoy it more, imo) I didn’t had the option to custom the character as I would have wanted it, as the actor closed any other option with her acting.

As for the wheel, versus the dialogue tree, I honestly see only one limitation regarding the later, and that is of plain individual preference of voice over muteness, (but the reverse preference limitation also exist, of course).

Frankly, if the voice provided does approach a character concept I’m interested in playing, I find voice acting greatly enjoyable, but if not, it becomes a barrier that can spoil the fun. My favorite example of this is Mass Effect:

female Shepard has a style I greatly enjoy, as it fits a type of personality I enjoy playing, on the other hand, male Shepard acting is completely at odds with what I would like Shepard to be; as a result I’ve abandoned playing with him early on. The dialogue itself available is mostly the same, the style of deliverance, it isn’t. In other words, the written text itself allows for greatly different styles and personalities while the actual spoken words greatly narrow it. That is why some, like me, can enjoy Hale’s performance, while not enjoying Meer’s and others prefer precisely the opposite.

I felt the same way, I just can't play female Shepard as renegade nor male as paragon because of the voice acting doesn't feel right to me in these circumstances. There would be no problem were Shepard a silent PC.

LordKinoda wrote...
HA ! You are only proving what I JUST STATED. You are deluded into thinking you can apply MULTIPLE intents to a given line. It's just NOT possible. The NPC's only respond a certain way to a given line. Ugh. Only in your OWN mind does it make sense, with your imagination fixing the holes. The game cannot compensate for this. Period.

Neither option is perfect. Silent and Voiced characters both have their pros and cons. But for me, the voiced pros' far outweigh the cons everytime, whereas the silent does not. As I said, I can deal with a silent character, and still love the game as one of my all time favorites (KOTOR that'd be you), but a voiced character will always trump a silent one.

Which is another reason why how the NPC respond is ultimately immaterial. Since a single reaction can come from an enormous range of actions, then for all intents and purposes the NPCs are reacting to that enormous range, not just from the one imagined by the writer. Yes, it may be an illusion, but since it's an illusion that fits perfectly, then like I said for all intents and purposes it's real.

[vallore]

LordKinoda wrote...

You need an example?

The phrase, “this is nice day, isn’t it?.” Is simple and straightforward enough. Yet, I can obtain PRECISELY the same answer form the npc I’m addressing while conveying very different information within it, WHITHOUT forcing it in a way that doesn’t really fit.

I can use a vibrant joyous tone, more an affirmation than a question, indicating the character is happy and loving it.

I can sound somewhat undecided, making it less an affirmation and more a request for confirmation.

I can use it as simply a pretext to start a conversation

And so on.



But with the voiced character, the only option is the one provided by the actor, period.

So no, logic very much supports this.

HA ! You are only proving what I JUST STATED. You are deluded into thinking you can apply MULTIPLE intents to a given line. It's just NOT possible. The NPC's only respond a certain way to a given line. Ugh. Only in your OWN mind does it make sense, with your imagination fixing the holes. The game cannot compensate for this. Period.

Oh! By  Andraste’s flaming knickers…really …



In my  post you initially quoted I wrote:

“But such restrictions didn't exist with the Warden because, without voice, it alowed you to fill it with the mood and style you disired, within far more generous limits than those Hawke allowed.”

"Mood and style", "within limits". Methinks you quoted a post you didn’t understood, and complained about what I didn’t said... and then you did it again.



I suggest you load a game of ME.

Pick up a male Shepard, follow up a few lines of his acting. Then load another one with Hale’s version of Shepard, following  the same path you took previously. Same lines, same NPC answers, different Shepards, and not just about the gender.  And a  third actor could also create yet another different  Shepard.  Ask yourself why.

Then,  I further suggest you read what I posted again, then read what you posted, again. It now should be bluntly obvious where and why you were wrong.

[Barry Bathernak]

silent is at 51%(488 votes)
voiced is at 49%(468 votes)

[LordKinoda]

I suggest you load a game of ME.

Pick up a male Shepard, follow up a few lines of his acting. Then load another one with Hale’s version of Shepard, following the same path you took previously. Same lines, same NPC answers, different Shepards, and not just about the gender. And a third actor could also create yet another different Shepard. Ask yourself why.

Then, I further suggest you read what I posted again, then read what you posted, again. It now should be bluntly obvious where and why you were wrong.

Heh, you lost me there...

More context will help illuminate your point. Quotes from me and you, okay. Quote me, and you, to help your point in your next post. I've been quoting quite a few people throughout the duration of this thread. Simply saying I've quoted you and whatever you happened to be referencing doesn't help me.

[Foolsfolly]

I prefer the Voiced Protagonist because it allows me to play as a character that exists in that game world. The protagonist also can interact more realistically (Silent Protagonists get large info-dumps on them usually talking to the Protagonist as if they were born yesterday because they're really talking to the player.)

I like the voiced protagonist. I like the feel that I'm playing as a person in that world more than the feeling that I'm in that world.

But it's a narrow thing. I've got 6 character on New Vegas and now that all the DLC is out for that I'm about to start a 7th. That's a silent protagonist. And the characters really do talk through my avatar and to me (literally looking at the screen). It doesn't bother me but the Courier really doesn't interact with any character. You can have a few companions that you talk to but there's no comradery with them. There's no feeling that the Courier lives within the Mojave Wasteland.

Meanwhile playing as Hawke feels like Hawke is a part of that world. Hawke has a name, has a face, has a voice. Hawke emotes, has weight. It makes me settle into the character easier. Make the believability easier for me.

But again it's not a huge make-or-break issue. I am eagerly awaiting Skyrim which will have a silent protagonist and I'm not about to complain about that.

But I do like voiced protagonists more. As long as I get to decide what they say. I felt much more connected to Alpha Protocol's Mike Thorton than I did Splinter Cell's Sam Fischer, despite both having unalterable faces and names. And it all comes down to choices in dialogue and actions.

So there's my answer, for what ever anyone cares.

Modifié par Foolsfolly, 28 septembre 2011 - 06:20 .

[Gotholhorakh]

Silent, I think that rigidly defined voice acting affects immediate gameplay experience, and the indirect consequences  for editorial freedom/content generation/development time/budgets are likely to detract from the size, timeliness and quality of released content.

Eudaemonium wrote...

Secondly, role-playing. The silent protagonist gives someone more RP choices, but for me, this is actually a point against it - at least in the way it is handled. I played Origins through several times, RPing a plethora of different characters, but for me they always felt like characters in spite of rather than because of the game. Most of the character's personality was just in my head and wasn't remotely reflected in the experience of playing, save for the occasional dialogue option. I might as well have been writing fan-fiction or my own short stories.

...and?

That's what role-playing IS.

Sorry, forgive my tone, I'm not arguing with what you like. What does rankle a little for me is that RP has become a sort of "non-existent activity that nobody really does" lately in certain circles, but I'm sure that it is being done, and people are trying to RP with these games, because we discuss it a lot.

RP is a creative activity for your own entertainment, the sweet point between the normal setting provided by the person running the game, and you having more freedom than you would ever have in a book or a movie, to govern your PC's character and actions.

I feel that people who consider using their own imaginations to think of stuff they like as laborious work, like writing their own fan-fic, must be a minority. I hope they are.

It's not complicated, it's not writing your own fan fic, it's sweet sweet fun that almost anyone could enjoy if it's made readily accessible to them. It'd probably be a welcome break from the boring, spoon-fed sludge of TV.

By necessity this means the writing is difficult because the story must take a step back, be a little more passive (some might say a little more bland, but this just isn't true if the right person is doing it) and flexible to accommodate the PC in being whoever the hell the Player wants.

It's a lot harder to write for that, and the almost universal mechanisms people resort to are cliches like the blight, because they provide easy, strong tropes everyone understands, that will continue to "work" whatever the PCs do. It's set design for an ad-libbed play, so it's hard and sometimes, where its weak points are, it's just a little bit generic.

I think the writing direction that DA2 takes is to throw this out of the window and try to dictate the story so its structure and narrative can be a little stronger and more sophisticated  - but this is IMO done at the cost of RP considerations, rather than cleverly done with them in mind. I'm assuming the holes and swathes of unwritten/unpadded story
are due to time constraints, going by the record of passable RPG story
in the past.

For this reason, I suspect RP is unimportant now in these games, and will get less important in the future, which is why the dialogue wheel, the rigidly defined and voiced PC and the paraphrasing are all, I suspect, objects of inertia. I think that's sad.


Anyway. I'm not saying you're "wrong", but honestly... I think there's a lot of failure to understand what RP is, why it's fun, and what you are missing when it's removed. If all "RPG"s become hack and slash brawlers, online chat rooms with grinding or spreadsheet-like stats-fiddling exercises because "over long years the inhabitants have forgotten magic", we will all be poorer for it.

Anyway, rant done, sorry

Modifié par Gotholhorakh, 29 septembre 2011 - 08:58 .

[Gibb_Shepard]

Wow, this poll is very even.

I personally prefer a Voiced protagonist, under the right circumstances. A good VA, NO PARAPHRASING (Aim for Deus Ex: HR) and a good VA.

I also never roleplay a character as myself. Even with silent PC's, they always resemble a character i created, and then i just witness their growth and eventual conclusion. I realize it is hard to roleplay as yourself with a voiced PC, so i can see why some would prefer the silent PC in that respect. But since i enjoy creating fictional characters, a voiced protag just adds the dynamic conversations that a silent PC can't.

[Porenferser]

Tough one.
Viced protagonists are great when they have personality (Geralt of Rivia, Adam Jensen, Nameless hero etc), but when they don't, it just sucks.
Also, silent heros have the advantage that you can imagine everything.
I would even say that the few word pieces that were yelled in Origins were a very, very bad idea.
Looking at previous bioware games, silent heroes were always the better option.
Hawke and Shepard don't really have anything great or special thing, choice of races would have been far better.
So, in the end I voted for silent.

[Pasquale1234]

LordKinoda wrote...

You need an example?

The phrase, “this is nice day, isn’t it?.” Is simple and straightforward enough. Yet, I can obtain PRECISELY the same answer form the npc I’m addressing while conveying very different information within it, WHITHOUT forcing it in a way that doesn’t really fit.

I can use a vibrant joyous tone, more an affirmation than a question, indicating the character is happy and loving it.

I can sound somewhat undecided, making it less an affirmation and more a request for confirmation.

I can use it as simply a pretext to start a conversation

And so on.



But with the voiced character, the only option is the one provided by the actor, period.

So no, logic very much supports this.

HA ! You are only proving what I JUST STATED. You are deluded into thinking you can apply MULTIPLE intents to a given line. It's just NOT possible. The NPC's only respond a certain way to a given line. Ugh. Only in your OWN mind does it make sense, with your imagination fixing the holes. The game cannot compensate for this. Period.

And it still DOESN'T MATTER.  NPCs will respond however they are programmed to respond, regardless of what was going through the protag's mind and heart when s/he delivered the line.  That is normal communication - in any conversation, the receiver of a line of dialogue will respond to it according to the receiver's own personal filters, mood, relationship with the transmitter, etc.  That is no different from real life.  There is no hole to fix.

Neither option is perfect. Silent and Voiced characters both have their pros and cons. But for me, the voiced pros' far outweigh the cons everytime, whereas the silent does not. As I said, I can deal with a silent character, and still love the game as one of my all time favorites (KOTOR that'd be you), but a voiced character will always trump a silent one.

There is no "pro" to a voiced protag, only disadvantages and restrictions.  You are restricted to delivering every single line with the VA's voice in the way the VA delivered the line (not to mention the accompanying cinematics).  You have no room to play the role from a different headspace or heartspace, no room to actually ROLEPLAY the scene, because the VA and animations have already done it for you.  Your only option as a player is to choose which one of the canned, pre-recorded responses your protag will deliver at any given point.  In so doing, you may be the writer or director of the movie, but you are no longer acting in it - which is pretty much what roleplaying is.

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

I also never roleplay a character as myself. Even with silent PC's, they always resemble a character i created, and then i just witness their growth and eventual conclusion. I realize it is hard to roleplay as yourself with a voiced PC, so i can see why some would prefer the silent PC in that respect. But since i enjoy creating fictional characters, a voiced protag just adds the dynamic conversations that a silent PC can't.

I don't, either - I play a character concept, based largely on that character's background.  Voiced protag severely limits the characterization.

Modifié par Pasquale1234, 29 septembre 2011 - 01:08 .

[Aradace]

Pasquale1234 wrote...
There is no "pro" to a voiced protag, only disadvantages and restrictions..

What's funny, is that you probably think this statement is a universal fact.  Sorry, but it's not.  That may be your OPINION on the stance but it is certainly not a fact.  Because I happen to feel the exact opposite you do on the matter and that there is no "pro" to a silent protag.  If you're going to have an opinion on the matter, have an opinion.  But dont try and preach this kind of obvious exaggeration and try to pass it off as fact.

[happy_daiz]

Aradace wrote...

Pasquale1234 wrote...
There is no "pro" to a voiced protag, only disadvantages and restrictions..

What's funny, is that you probably think this statement is a universal fact.  Sorry, but it's not.  That may be your OPINION on the stance but it is certainly not a fact.  Because I happen to feel the exact opposite you do on the matter and that there is no "pro" to a silent protag.  If you're going to have an opinion on the matter, have an opinion.  But dont try and preach this kind of obvious exaggeration and try to pass it off as fact.

^This. You should play Folklore to really bring home the point. I can't tell you how many times I wondered "wtf, why isn't my pc actually talking?" The bleeping idiots more or less just held up picket signs to say what they were thinking. I don't see how that would be a logical advancement. Of course, that came out 2 years before Dragon Age.

[Aradace]

happy_daiz wrote...

Aradace wrote...

Pasquale1234 wrote...
There is no "pro" to a voiced protag, only disadvantages and restrictions..

What's funny, is that you probably think this statement is a universal fact.  Sorry, but it's not.  That may be your OPINION on the stance but it is certainly not a fact.  Because I happen to feel the exact opposite you do on the matter and that there is no "pro" to a silent protag.  If you're going to have an opinion on the matter, have an opinion.  But dont try and preach this kind of obvious exaggeration and try to pass it off as fact.

^This. You should play Folklore to really bring home the point. I can't tell you how many times I wondered "wtf, why isn't my pc actually talking?" The bleeping idiots more or less just held up picket signs to say what they were thinking. I don't see how that would be a logical advancement. Of course, that came out 2 years before Dragon Age.

Everytime I picked a dialog option for my Warden (rp'ing or not) I couldnt help but think of Wile E' Coyote in Looney Tunes whenever he'd hold up those ridiculously funny signs just before he'd fall over a cliff or whatnot lol.

[happy_daiz]

Aradace wrote...

Everytime I picked a dialog option for my Warden (rp'ing or not) I couldnt help but think of Wile E' Coyote in Looney Tunes whenever he'd hold up those ridiculously funny signs just before he'd fall over a cliff or whatnot lol.

Yes, exactly! Clearly you have to be a lot more imaginative than I am to enjoy reading the words. I'd rather hear the inflection in my pc's voice. For me, that means immersion.

[Pasquale1234]

Aradace wrote...

Pasquale1234 wrote...
There is no "pro" to a voiced protag, only disadvantages and restrictions..

What's funny, is that you probably think this statement is a universal fact.  Sorry, but it's not.  That may be your OPINION on the stance but it is certainly not a fact.  Because I happen to feel the exact opposite you do on the matter and that there is no "pro" to a silent protag.  If you're going to have an opinion on the matter, have an opinion.  But dont try and preach this kind of obvious exaggeration and try to pass it off as fact.

I am very aware that it is my opinion, and hoped that would go without my specifically stating as much.

I would really like to understand how it is that anyone can feel they are actually role-playing a character with pre-recorded, canned responses.  I have yet to read a post that helps me to understand that point of view.

And it's interesting that you chose only the first sentence in that paragraph to respond to, and ignored the exposition provided in the rest of the paragraph.

Modifié par Pasquale1234, 29 septembre 2011 - 02:40 .

[Aradace]

happy_daiz wrote...

Aradace wrote...

Everytime I picked a dialog option for my Warden (rp'ing or not) I couldnt help but think of Wile E' Coyote in Looney Tunes whenever he'd hold up those ridiculously funny signs just before he'd fall over a cliff or whatnot lol.

Yes, exactly! Clearly you have to be a lot more imaginative than I am to enjoy reading the words. I'd rather hear the inflection in my pc's voice. For me, that means immersion.

For me, its not that Im "unimaginative" (I used to write short story novels and distribute them to my friends all the time years back before I joined the military).  It's just that, if I want to "imagine" what the character is saying, I'll read a book.  The only time I RP that hardcore, is when Im going old school DnD.